As you read this an argument/discussion/intense talk on how to make interviews is going on in the blog-sphere. Should reporters use telephone, e-mail or quote blogs?
Starring the drama is Jason Calacanis at Calacanis.com who was pinged by a Wired journalist who wanted to ask some questions about Michael Arringtons (TechCrunch.com) high blog-status. Calacanis wanted to do the interview through e-mail, to avoid beeing missquoted. “A wired writer who won’t do an email interview–thats ironic! Frankly, you need to adapt'” he writes in an e-mail to the reporter published on his blog.
Calacanis also refers to Dave Winer at Scripting.com. Winer was contacted by the same reporter, but he wanted to recieve the question by e-mail and post thoughts on them on his blog. Neither of them say they need Wired to reach an audience.
At Wireds blog Epicenter the reporter fires back, saying Calacanis acting cowardly.
It’s an interesting conversation to read, filled with emotions. And the discussion is important. We don’t have the solution but we know that a “real” conversation (i e a meeting or talking on the phone) gives the writer/producer a chance to follow up on answers and also to read the emotional/psychological tone of the talk. It also gives the person beeing interviewed a possibility to explain him- or herself further. On the other hand e-mail is great to check quotes when the piece is finally written. And blogs are a good source of information. Maybe the future reporter should do interviews through video conferences?
Standing on the verge of the future media landscape, we at PodTech believe in combining the methods, using the tool that results in the best content. Why? Because content fuels conversations, and thats what the future in media is all about.
By John Furrier and Tina Magnergard Bjers